Agreed. However, based on early reports I'm not sure that pushing patches into
WinSxS is really working due to the complexity that is the CustomActions to
work around bugs in WinXP. The ideas behind Fusion are interesting but the
complexity of the system has made it difficult to verify and for users to truly
understand it.
Personally, I prefer a model where a patch to a shared binary has the ability
to update that binary everywhere (not that I can get anyone in Microsoft to
agree with me, so maybe I'm just confused <smile/>).
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mike Dimmick
Sent: Friday, March 16, 2007 12:56 PM
To: Rob Mensching; 'Chris Bardon'; wix-users@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [WiX-users] Consensus about CRT/MCF merge modules?
However, with static linking you have the servicing problem - if there's a
security issue in the CRT (not unknown) or in MFC, you will have to rebuild
your application to pick up the fix, then rerelease your application. By
contrast, if using the WinSxS versions, Microsoft can ship an update directly
to end-users (either as an updated assembly with the same version number, but
different file version number, or as an additional assembly with a newer
version number plus a policy binding).
I have to admit looking at how the VS2005 CRT merge modules work and being a
bit confused as to why they're configured to do something different on Vista
(not just using MsiAssembly/MsiAssemblyName tables) especially as they were
released over a year before Vista was.
Using a private copy of the DLLs in your application directory is also a
possibility but I don't think this is recommended (or even permitted?) for a
final distribution. It still has the servicing problem but not the problem of
having to rebuild the application or having the large binaries.
--
Mike Dimmick
________________________________
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Rob Mensching
Sent: 16 March 2007 16:35
To: Chris Bardon; wix-users@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [WiX-users] Consensus about CRT/MCF merge modules?
I'm not quite yet ready to make this a "recommendation" but I'm currently
leaning towards statically linking the libraries directly. I'm seeing hints
that the WinSxS/Fusion stuff they did for these libraries in VS2005 has some
seriously bad repercussions when it comes to patching and some possibly strange
behavior on Vista. It's a research project I'm doing slowly...
For the WiX toolset, we statically link to the CRT (MFC, haven't done that
since I wrote Orca <grin/>) to minimize our dependencies on the machine. That
makes the binaries a bit bigger but it is worth it to not have to worry about
"Is the WinSxS store updated at X point in time in my install?"
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Chris Bardon
Sent: Friday, March 16, 2007 9:20 AM
To: wix-users@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: [WiX-users] Consensus about CRT/MCF merge modules?
Looking through the archives, there appear to be a couple of ways to include
things like the CRT and MFC redistributables in an installer. Some have
advocated including the DLLs directly, which seems to go against the concept of
having a redistributable MSM to link against. I tried building with the
Microsoft CRT msm that comes with VS 2005, and got a long list of warnings from
light.
Is there a "recommended" method for dealing with these kinds of dependencies?
Chris
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT
Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your
opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys-and earn cash
http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV
_______________________________________________
WiX-users mailing list
WiX-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wix-users
